I don't see how this particular definition has any relevance to your earlier argument. Could you please clarify?

Back to square one while contradicting the first part of your post. If you're saying someone is spiritual but not religious, you can't say that they also have a specific concept of god at the same time. That's simply inventing your own religion (it doesn't matter whether that "religion" has a million followers or just one; it's a theology).

Well, a scientist or anyone familiar with a dictionary. I guess I'm still trying to follow the train of thought of your original argument, which is rather difficult with all these competeing concepts of "religious" floating around, competeing with one another.

You're saying that there is some obvious dicotomy that people either get or they don't, but when pressed, it seems obvious that we have to admit that both sides are the same in more ways then they are different.

Just basically you could arguably call nondenominational under the religion bracket which is fine. It doesn't necessarily cover those who do not belong to religions (christianity, judasim, islam, etc.) who simply believes there is some kind of higher power, if vaguely/generalized. A pin saying 'in god we trust' could arguably represent them; Or it may not necessarily either. But if that's belief invention to you then I guess there's no real argument here.

I'm saying the difference is:

God>Religion versus Religion>God.

As if it really matters to anyeone who has fit both under 'superstition' anyway, as I've seen in your other posts elsewhere. So my pointing out this apparently minor difference is going nowhere...

Quote:

I'm not convinced that you did, however I'm still very interested in understanding the argument.

Argument? I thought

Quote:

Originally Posted by myself

There are people who are not religious that believe in God, and I'd say God is not necessarily a religious concept.

was qualified as only an opinion statement as I conceded the thread before you even asked me anything.
As it is ambivalently worded, though. Sorry for tany confusion.

IIRC:

Quote:

Originally Posted by myself

However, I can't really find any other grounds to argue on.
I guess the guy was asking to get fired. It's a privately owned business. I agree with Tommy, they're probably covering their hides.

If he had a problem with it, why not find another hardware store that allowed it and in the meantime resign from Home Depot to work there where it was more tolerated? He had plenty of time.

I was under the impression you were merely asking me to clarify my opinion. You're not convinced and that's ok. We just agree to disagree. I see a difference, and you don't. Not really a problem.